Tasmanian AFL Team

[whatwhat say what 22,896]

i still maintain there is zero $$ value in a tasmanian team coming in as the 19th team - adds nothing to the media rights coffers, which is what funds the game at the end of the day

it's definitely got a feed good factor, but tasmania's population hovers around that 500,000 mark - it's dwarfed by the gw$ or gc17 catchment areas for population growth, let alone the value of having two extra teams up north in terms of media rights value

i loathe those franchises, but it was the 'correct' move to bring them in; tasmania is just pandering to already converted footy fans

i'm more curious about when they'll bring the 20th team in - i am assuming it'll be a third team based in perth

[No. 31 1,299]

I know we are in inflationary and tight budgetary times but the stadium development in Hobart really has the the possibility of propelling Hobart & Tasmania to another level as a domestic tourism destination. Sure some of the figures seem eyewatering but that is not just the stadium, its pretty much an urban renewal project near Hobart CBD and should contain some subtantial private investment in retail, hospitality and housing components with contributuons from both Federal and State governments.

Sure they could look at some cost saving measures as well. I wonder if they have looked at some of the fabric retractable roofing system that are in a number of German and Polish stadiums? 🤔

 

[No. 31 1,299]

53 minutes ago, whatwhat say what said:

i still maintain there is zero $$ value in a tasmanian team coming in as the 19th team - adds nothing to the media rights coffers, which is what funds the game at the end of the day

it's definitely got a feed good factor, but tasmania's population hovers around that 500,000 mark - it's dwarfed by the gw$ or gc17 catchment areas for population growth, let alone the value of having two extra teams up north in terms of media rights value

i loathe those franchises, but it was the 'correct' move to bring them in; tasmania is just pandering to already converted footy fans

i'm more curious about when they'll bring the 20th team in - i am assuming it'll be a third team based in perth

Footy is at risk of losing a traditional market in Tasmania, it is on the decline as as a grass roots code.

20th team should be from Perth, focusing on North Perth/Joondalup with some secondary games in the NT.

 

[Rab D Nesbitt 8,432]

9 hours ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

Was discugusted by listening to Gerard Wheatley carry on the other day on AFL 360 that politicians in this country should 'grow some spine and get behind these new stadium builds' with reference to the Gabba/Olympics and Hobart stadium funding.  Geez Gerard not everyone can be gifted taxpayer gazillions like Geelong to rebuild thier boutique stadium.

While I'm all for appropriate investment in stadiums such has occurred to the MCG over the years, in the current economic climate, I agree that it's not really appropriate.  WA/Perth are rolling in mineral royalties, so thier recient upgrade isn't such an issue.  The Gabba is still a great quality stadium, although possibly 10,000 seats too small at times.  If there is really so much wrong with the Launceston and Hobat stadiums, the AFL should stop Hawthorn and North playing there imeediatley and give back the Tassie govenment all that sponsorship funding.

What I think the new Tassie govenment really needs to do is get some gumshum and go to the AFL CEO bloke who replaced Gillam what's his name and say "Hey AFL we've got 100,000 members signed up her now give us the F@#*ing team we should have had 10 years ago when you poored millions into a team in Western Sydney that still only has 20,000 members.  We'll play games at the existing stadiums in Hobart and Launceston until we're good and ready and maybe you can put in somd cash to upgrade them to persevere the game in a grass roots football state."

You make some fair points there, specifically, if both current grounds are good enough for North and Hawthorn to play in them then why can't the Devils? As for the Gabba if they took out all of the silly deck chairs at one end and huge LED screen that flashes Neds betting ads on the outer wing they could fit in more people. 

I get the feeling that the AFL are too far down the road with this now to back out and that any state government down there could probably stall the new stadium issue without it compromising the entry date of their new team. 

[whatwhat say what 22,896]

7 minutes ago, No. 31 said:

Footy is at risk of losing a traditional market in Tasmania, it is on the decline as as a grass roots code.

is it really tho? the amount of players coming into the afl system out of the tasmanian ecosystem seems to have grown in the last decade, not fallen

in truth, the amount of players coming through a bigger state like south australia is far more concerning and has been flagged at head office as a watch item

[ElDiablo14 5,002]

1 hour ago, whatwhat say what said:

i still maintain there is zero $$ value in a tasmanian team coming in as the 19th team - adds nothing to the media rights coffers, which is what funds the game at the end of the day

it's definitely got a feed good factor, but tasmania's population hovers around that 500,000 mark - it's dwarfed by the gw$ or gc17 catchment areas for population growth, let alone the value of having two extra teams up north in terms of media rights value

i loathe those franchises, but it was the 'correct' move to bring them in; tasmania is just pandering to already converted footy fans

i'm more curious about when they'll bring the 20th team in - i am assuming it'll be a third team based in perth

Wouldn't it make more sense to have a Canberra based team? In that scenario that team should be able to have similar catchment areas as GWS (playing some games in Western Sydney).

[Pates 9,660]

15 minutes ago, whatwhat say what said:

is it really tho? the amount of players coming into the afl system out of the tasmanian ecosystem seems to have grown in the last decade, not fallen

in truth, the amount of players coming through a bigger state like south australia is far more concerning and has been flagged at head office as a watch item

I swear I thought I read a report saying there had been a decline in Tasmanian born AFL listed players over the last 5-10 years. 

This Tasmanian team really is an interesting situation to watch unfolding, it really shows that they should have come first before GWS/GC and the AFL then make a call on where they place the 18th team. 20 teams feels too much, but 19 teams is pointless for the money that is going to be pumped into Tassie.

I honestly don't know where a 20th team could be placed, I feel like each option is as difficult as each other.

As for this stadium debacle, it's really interesting to see that across the last 12 months we've had the Com Games be cancelled in Victoria, the Olympic Stadium/precinct issues the Brissy still totally up in the air, and the back and forth between the AFL and Tasmania regarding a stadium in Hobart. All of these issues centring around cost blow outs and public backlash regarding huge funds going in that direction instead of towards helping people that are doing it tough.

My personal view, having been to Hobart for a match, is that Blundstone Arena functions ok as a once every so often venue in an exhibition way, but for the purposes of being a regular every second week sort of venue it just doesn't cut it. I think a new stadium would be key to the Tasmanian team being successful (which is think is the point that the AFL are making), and a world standard stadium would also bring in more events and more interest to the city as well as have the potential to create a great precinct for long into the future. Does it need a roof? To host multiple different events it probably does.

I also see the benefit of it creating jobs in a difficult climate for people being able to make a living. 

[Pates 9,660]

3 minutes ago, ElDiablo14 said:

Wouldn't it make more sense to have a Canberra based team? In that scenario that team should be able to have similar catchment areas as GWS (playing some games in Western Sydney).

Running through the Canberra in my head (and I absolutely will cave to people that might have better knowledge):

Canberra
Pros
- Has established a bit of keen interest in locals through GWS
- Has a ground already that is in use and would probably only require upgrades rather a new stadium/full rebuild
- Is smack bang between Melbourne and Sydney making travel not difficult for most teams
- Could they also have a connection the the NT and play games Darwin and Alice Springs?
- Another possible intrusion into a rugby area 

Cons
- Small town, does it have the population/sporting interest to demand an AFL team?
- GWS have built a solid interest there, will those people jump across to the new team? If they do does that remove significant support from GWS who don't have much as it is?
- Would the climate turn a potential recruits away from moving there? Is the lifestyle what a "sports start" would look for? (I only ask because I swear so many seem to be coastal style people) 

I think Canberra should be in the conversation as much as any location.

[Roost it far 8,570]

Could the 20th come from the NT?

[Roost it far 8,570]

On 23/03/2024 at 11:52, whatwhat say what said:

so if lambie's party holds the balance of power after today's state election, and they are fundamentally opposed to a new stadium being built, does that mean they can block it?

i'm mostly here just for the afl having a massive sulk

🍿

I’m imagining Lambie will be calling for the Federal and State governments to stump up some serious money for housing and hospitals if they want support for the stadium. If you’re poor in Tassie you’re f****ed.  The States  been run by corporates and lazy, bordering on corrupt governments for decades. They’re still selling native forests at a loss, allowing fish farms to ruin waterways and ignoring the people they’re supposed to serve. Various crooks have used it as their fiefdom, let’s hope the AFL don’t continue that oppression. Grassroots football is almost dead in the State.

[whatwhat say what 22,896]

56 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

Could the 20th come from the NT?

no

tiny population and the traditional football season (april to september) is not conducive to the competition given the weather

20th team has to be 3rd perth-based side; joondalup is the obvious place, as @No. 31 said up thread

if they're targeting tasmania in 2028 then they'll want that 20th team in by 2031 at the latest, in time for the next tv rights deal

even three seasons with 19 teams might be too much of an imbalance in structure and reduction of increased / perceived value in the competition

[Diamond_Jim 12,624]

To have a 20th team just for the sake of it does make you question the whole Tasmanian effort.

It's not as if both teams in any of the interstate cities are playing before sell out crowds.

TV wise very few people watch more than 3 games a weekend I would have thought

Tourism wise Hobart/Launceston are constrained by the number of flights. Let's say 2000 (10 planes) per match from interstate for 11 home games. It will take a long time to pay off that stadium.

 

 

Edited March 26 by Diamond_Jim

[Wizard of Koz 1,127]

5 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

i still maintain there is zero $$ value in a tasmanian team coming in as the 19th team - adds nothing to the media rights coffers, which is what funds the game at the end of the day

it's definitely got a feed good factor, but tasmania's population hovers around that 500,000 mark - it's dwarfed by the gw$ or gc17 catchment areas for population growth, let alone the value of having two extra teams up north in terms of media rights value

i loathe those franchises, but it was the 'correct' move to bring them in; tasmania is just pandering to already converted footy fans

i'm more curious about when they'll bring the 20th team in - i am assuming it'll be a third team based in perth

Said with such authority and pomp. Tasmanian is our great games heartland. If you cant see that the compassion and support our footy family needs in Tassie and debate it over the whole $$ rubbish that is sad. Trust me, the $$ will sort itself out. Always does. The games not going bankrupt because of Tassie! It's probably some long standing gripe you have had with someone over this and you cant get past it. If you love footy you just have to love the concept of Tassie in the family.  

Edited March 26 by Wizard of Koz

[Wizard of Koz 1,127]

2 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

no

tiny population and the traditional football season (april to september) is not conducive to the competition given the weather

20th team has to be 3rd perth-based side; joondalup is the obvious place, as @No. 31 said up thread

if they're targeting tasmania in 2028 then they'll want that 20th team in by 2031 at the latest, in time for the next tv rights deal

even three seasons with 19 teams might be too much of an imbalance in structure and reduction of increased / perceived value in the competition

 

No team for the NT. See above. Just a miserable take.

[Diamond_Jim 12,624]

The Tassie solution was easy but no one wanted it.

North plays ten games in Melbourne which were designated home games and 10 games in Tasmania. After 5 years the team and its admin is moved to Hobart but still continues its 10 games in Melbourne.

Sure it gives North a leg up financially and a continual home ground advantage but it is better than propping up two teams... North with AFL money and Tasmania with Government money

As to NT getting a team why not Ballarat or Bendigo.. it makes as much sense if not more.

Anyway good luck to the Devils... they may need it

$4M odd penalty every year that the stadium is not built is a lot for someone to find

Edited March 26 by Diamond_Jim

[Rodney (Balls) Grinter 10,870]

Seriously, what's the need for a 20th team?

The AFL season has two byes with an even No. of teams as it is for player management/welfare purposes, so a 20th team without any real justification isn't a necessity. 

Further, I think adding more teams, just dilutes the oppertities for the existing ones to taste ultimate sucess of a flag - on rule of averages, each team now has a 1 in 19 year oppertunity to win a flag Vs a 1 in 12 years in the old VFL.  I actually think this sucess starvation could ultimately end with the least successful of the existing Melbourne based teams becoming financially unviable.

[whatwhat say what 22,896]

2 hours ago, Wizard of Koz said:

Said with such authority and pomp. Tasmanian is our great games heartland. If you cant see that the compassion and support our footy family needs in Tassie and debate it over the whole $$ rubbish that is sad. Trust me, the $$ will sort itself out. Always does. The games not going bankrupt because of Tassie! It's probably some long standing gripe you have had with someone over this and you cant get past it. If you love footy you just have to love the concept of Tassie in the family.  

No issue with the team coming in but the stadium is completely unnecessary imo

They should’ve been in before those northern franchises that’s for sure

[greenwaves 489]

5 minutes ago, whatwhat say what said:

No issue with the team coming in but the stadium is completely unnecessary imo

I agree.  I think the AFL has taken advantage of Tasmania's desperation for a team to get a new stadium out of them.

[whatwhat say what 22,896]

Just now, greenwaves said:

I agree.  I think the AFL has taken advantage of Tasmania's desperation for a team to get a new stadium out of them.

And doesn’t it having a roof means it can’t be an officially accredited icc venue, which rules international cricket out from being played there? BBL is fine, but nothing at a higher level?

[Purple77 1,001]

This stadium debate, and criticism on cost, drives me up the bend.

All criticism is based on the principle. How can you possibly spend so much money when people are homeless and dying on ambulance ramps?

Of course those things are more important. Literally ANY investment can be positioned less appropriate/worthy than those things.

It shouldn't prohibit investment. Because at the end of the day... $715M, or $2B if it overruns, is not actually a lot of money. The original figure represents 9% of ONE year of the existing budgeted spend on Health, without accounting for Housing. The stadium cost will be spread out across multiple years, which means as a % of health, it is even lower. The stadium budget wouldn't necessarily otherwise be available for Health, as the spend has only been made available for this specific project (which is especially the case for the federal $240M contribution).

Comments on the cost as a taxpayer I don't get either. It's the same as talking about salary management at AFL clubs. You've got absolutely zero control on how its spent, so it's moot to talk about. 

Jacqui Lambie went on The Project and ranted that Tasmania can't afford the Stadium, because Mick Malthouse (you read correctly) said Tasmania can't afford it. I'm not misinterpreting, that is what she said. Everything she says on this matter is invalid.

I implore the doubters to not be hung up on the principle of the spend, recognise its not a lot of money, and start seeing the opportunity this will bring Tasmania.

[No. 31 1,299]

6 hours ago, Pates said:

Running through the Canberra in my head (and I absolutely will cave to people that might have better knowledge):

Canberra
Pros
- Has established a bit of keen interest in locals through GWS
- Has a ground already that is in use and would probably only require upgrades rather a new stadium/full rebuild
- Is smack bang between Melbourne and Sydney making travel not difficult for most teams
- Could they also have a connection the the NT and play games Darwin and Alice Springs?
- Another possible intrusion into a rugby area 

Cons
- Small town, does it have the population/sporting interest to demand an AFL team?
- GWS have built a solid interest there, will those people jump across to the new team? If they do does that remove significant support from GWS who don't have much as it is?
- Would the climate turn a potential recruits away from moving there? Is the lifestyle what a "sports start" would look for? (I only ask because I swear so many seem to be coastal style people) 

I think Canberra should be in the conversation as much as any location.

Canberra is growing as a city in terms of population and should have a population similar to Tasmania in the near future. It can also tap into adjacent areas of Southern NSW (Riverina) which is strong in Australian Rules Football in any event.

Northern Kangaroos anyone? Based in the ACT, have a few games in the NT and the Melbourne supporter base still can watch them live when they play Melbourne clubs ... 🤔

[Purple77 1,001]

25 minutes ago, whatwhat say what said:

No issue with the team coming in but the stadium is completely unnecessary imo

They should’ve been in before those northern franchises that’s for sure

Genuine question, have you been to Blundstone Arena?

It's situated in residential, congested area, and in walking distance to 1 pub and 1 pub only. I'm not saying that's a sensible barometer, only to demonstrate it's distance away from all pre and post game amenities (there are no hotels on the eastern shore) that maximise the associated economic benefits from having an AFL Team.

It needs to be in the city. It needs to be at Macquarie point.

 

Edited March 26 by Purple77

[Ouch! 2,266]

8 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

i still maintain there is zero $$ value in a tasmanian team coming in as the 19th team - adds nothing to the media rights coffers, which is what funds the game at the end of the day

it's definitely got a feed good factor, but tasmania's population hovers around that 500,000 mark - it's dwarfed by the gw$ or gc17 catchment areas for population growth, let alone the value of having two extra teams up north in terms of media rights value

i loathe those franchises, but it was the 'correct' move to bring them in; tasmania is just pandering to already converted footy fans

i'm more curious about when they'll bring the 20th team in - i am assuming it'll be a third team based in perth

So about the same value as your incessant negativity brings to demonland you say?  Sometimes if you don't have something positive to say, consider keeping your views to yourself. 

I believe you are wrong on the $$ value, I believe the feel good factor alone is more than enough of a reason to have Tassie in the competition, and the predicted 200k by easter foundation members that incidentally include a significant number of people who support other teams and live on the mainland would suggest that it does too.

Who gives a stuff about the catchment areas when we are talking about this issue?  I'd love to know the TV viewing numbers that have gone with the GC and GWS, I suspect the AFL wanted to get into the NRL market, and I doubt that the ratings are that solid, I firmly believe Demetiou made the wrong call, and I suspect the vast majority of people would now consider that to be true.

Hobart as a market, is very similar to Geelong?  Heck.... Victoria is a state of 6.5million, and you have 10 teams, roughly speaking thats 650k per team, Tas as a population is 550k, but Tassie will be supporting and behind one team. No one is 'Pandering' to converted footy fans. Tasmania deserves a team, and has done for decades. 

[Ouch! 2,266]

1 hour ago, Diamond_Jim said:

The Tassie solution was easy but no one wanted it.

North plays ten games in Melbourne which were designated home games and 10 games in Tasmania. After 5 years the team and its admin is moved to Hobart but still continues its 10 games in Melbourne.

Sure it gives North a leg up financially and a continual home ground advantage but it is better than propping up two teams... North with AFL money and Tasmania with Government money

As to NT getting a team why not Ballarat or Bendigo.. it makes as much sense if not more.

Anyway good luck to the Devils... they may need it

$4M odd penalty every year that the stadium is not built is a lot for someone to find

Hawks since 2001 and Nth since 2012. Given the last arrangement with the Hawks will be $13.5 mil for 2 years ending in 2025) it's not a stretch to assume that the Tas Gov (i.e Taxpayer money) could exceed $200million dollars for the 'honour' of hosting these Vic clubs. The financial / economic benefit has apparently been worth us doing it, so why do people think that a stadium and supporting a single Tasmanian team wouldn't have a greater impact. 

Can I honestly ask for those of you in Victoria, given the way Dan Andrews has wasted money ... would any of you even 'blink' about a project that would cost Vic taxpayers $375million?  Its less than what you are paying to NOT host the comm games!  Also it's somewhat amusing that people seem to think that the AFL has no right to ask for a stadium to be attached to the license. GWS & GC still needed a commitment from govt/councils to make Metricon and the Showgrounds fit for purpose to play AFL there. 

[greenwaves 489]

25 minutes ago, Purple77 said:

Genuine question, have you been to Blundstone Arena?

It's situated in residential, congested area, and in walking distance to 1 pub and 1 pub only. I'm not saying that's a sensible barometer, only to demonstrate it's distance away from all pre and post game amenities (there are no hotels on the eastern shore) that maximise the associated economic benefits from having an AFL Team.

It needs to be in the city. It needs to be at Macquarie point.

 

No one's saying a new stadium wouldn't be better.  Of course it would be better but a lot of Tasmanian feel other things like housing and cost of living are more important and that's fair enough.